Evaluating chemical risks: results of a survey of the British Toxicology Society

TLDR

Previous surveys of toxicologists and the public in the United States and Canada had examined attitudes toward chemical risks. The study surveyed members of the British Toxicology Society to assess their attitudes, beliefs, and perceptions regarding chemical hazards. Data from 312 completed questionnaires were analyzed. British toxicologists judged most chemical hazards as low risk, held favorable attitudes toward chemical use, trusted regulations, displayed higher risk perception among women, showed industry affiliation differences, were uncertain about the reliability of animal studies for human risk—especially carcinogenicity—yet remained confident in assessing human health risks.

Abstract

1 Members of the British Toxicology Society partici pated in a survey to determine their attitudes, beliefs, and perceptions regarding risks from chemicals. Similar surveys had previously been conducted with toxicologists and members of the general public in the United States and Canada. Data from 312 completed questionnaires were analyzed. 2 In general, the British toxicologists judged risks to be quite low for most hazards, with the exception of cigarette smoking and asbestos. They tended to have quite favorable attitudes toward the use of chemicals and were confident about the adequacy of chemical regulations. 3 As in previous studies of toxicologists, women expressed higher perceptions of risk than did men and had consistently stronger anti-chemical attitudes. 4 Toxicologists working in industry had more favorable attitudes towards chemicals and their use than did those working in academic settings. 5 When asked to evaluate technical summaries of various animal studies there was considerable dis agreement among the respondents about the toxicity of the chemicals involved. 6 In general, British toxicologists were equivocal about the reliability of animal studies in predicting human effects (particularly carcinogenicity) probably be cause of the belief that animal studies overestimate risk. However, they were rather confident that human health risks could be assessed reasonably accurately.